From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 4 07:24:52 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 517DA16A412 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2006 07:24:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mlusetti@gmail.com) Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.177]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1876043D5D for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2006 07:24:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mlusetti@gmail.com) Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id o67so137997pye for ; Wed, 04 Oct 2006 00:24:50 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=TZ+oslMC8UDBEq5jMzy8qN6f6MbmyIGEUT7HC9cqdcnUUypPrbw2t1BLB2PlUg6eVkftS+BREX2WVmMDms2BW9nUa0aI4qfOKd8TkLpqNbK6soVkg0Z0SZUXGdTM68v5T9hVdpS4xwvKjEg61/rdDpZF8NOkPvB5Ve4vcNm2IaA= Received: by 10.35.121.2 with SMTP id y2mr607017pym; Wed, 04 Oct 2006 00:24:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.35.48.16 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Oct 2006 00:24:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 09:24:50 +0200 From: "Massimo Lusetti" To: "David Sledge" In-Reply-To: <452286C2.3030902@appriss.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <768690DD58883C4FAA0C089A534F94DF2054DE@intexch02.int.appriss.com> <54A56D47DC749F45C4291FD0@rambutan.pingpong.net> <452286C2.3030902@appriss.com> Cc: Palle Girgensohn , freebsd-java@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Eclipse 3.2 port (java/eclipse32) X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 07:24:52 -0000 On 10/3/06, David Sledge wrote: > Working on the build for 3.2.1 now. Hoping to have it done by the end of > the day. We talked about updating the the old port on this mailing list > and more people seemed to want it to be a separate port so we did not > break the dependencies. I am getting more and more emails now supporting > to update the existing eclipse port. I have no problem with that. I will > ask again how many people would prefer updating the original eclipse > port versus creating a new port? Please comment on this ASAP as I am > working on an update to eclipse 3.2.1. FWIW I guess the right way wuold be to upgrade the original port as anyway if you upgrade eclipse SDK you have to (in a way or the other) upgrade all other plugins etc... So a big warning or a broken flag on dependandt (broken) ports should suffice, IMHO, you can read this as "should suffice to me" :) Regards and thanks for the great work. -- Massimo http://meridio.blogspot.com